akira_akuma said:

Quote:

Tell that to Jews, gypsies, freemasons, homosexuals etc etc.

---

past .... present.
you know these are two different things right?

---

run that by me one more time...

Why would you ignore an important historical parallel and dismiss it as just being from the past therefore..what? its obsolete?

Quote:

Quote:

Whether it was accepted in the past by people is irrelevant to its morality.

---

you are simply wrong.

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Presentism

Quote:

Another common form of presentism is allowing present-day moral judgments to creep into characterizations of the historical figures. For example, you can dig up quotes from any number of figures active in civil liberties or equal rights movements that would seem racist, sexist, or otherwise bigoted by today's standards to paint them as crazy, reactionary wingnuts.[1] Historians remind us that people are products of their times and so must be judged within that paradigm. Some, especially politicians, are often blamed for consequences of their actions that they could not have foreseen. This often boils down to legal-esque argument over whether the individual was negligent, short-sighted, or acting with malicious intent. In good scholarly historical work, like in law, it's imperative to separate the consequences of the action from the intent.

---

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presentism_%28literary_and_historical_analysis%29#Moral_judgments

---

Quote:

Nazi recuitment is on the rise. Again, Hitler, Mussolini and Franco started small with just a few nutcases.

---

Quote:

Why can't we say that it was wrong then and we can address the structural imbalances that continue as a legacy from that time?

---

i don't think anyone is saying just that. he just disagrees on your conclusions. not your premise.

Quote:

The colonial demand for slaves, and the weapons that came to Africa through the trade, meant that African kings were incentivised to launch wars for the purpose of capturing more slaves for export to European traders.

---

Quote:

How do you think the Jews and other groups were killed in such numbers?

---

Quote:

Enlil explained this already. If you are poor and white, you still go to prison less than poor and black people.

having white privilege doesn't mean that all white people have it amazing. class and gender and other factors come into it too.

---

Quote:

By its essence, privilege is blindless. As an able bodied person, I don't know what its like to have the lived experiences of a disabled person. If I spent the day in a wheelchair and tried to get around London then maybe I would be more aware of the privileges I take for granted. Does it mean that you can't have a poor able-bodied man and a rich disabled man? No.

---

Quote:

If you dress up as a Muslim woman in the UK then maybe you'll understand what its like to have that lived experience and the obstacles that come with it.

---

Quote:

In fact. there was a programme on BBC last week of a white woman doing exactly that. She used to be very prejudiced to Muslims and then lived as one for a week and that changed her a lot. It's called 'my week as a muslim' or something if you're interested.. which i doubt.

---

yeah, and then there are Muslims coming out and warning people about Muslims and the lifestyle.

akira_akuma said:

so cut off your arms.

---

akira_akuma said:

Quote:

If you dress up as a Muslim woman in the UK then maybe you'll understand what its like to have that lived experience and the obstacles that come with it.

---

why does anyone who isn't a Muslim woman have to care?

---

Quote:

In March, anti-Semitic posters were spread across the University of Illinois at Chicago attacking “white privilege” and going further by charging that white privilege is primarily “Jewish privilege.” Mockingly the posters ask: “Is the 1 [percent] straight white men” or “is the 1 [percent] Jewish?” The poster’s harangue has a dark, stated presumption: “Ending white privilege … starts with ending Jewish privilege.”

---

Quote:

This is why you have no respect from me. are you debating or just being a dick?

---

this is why? because i used wit?

lol, but look at all the times you loved my shit

https://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/23619236#23619236
https://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/23854468#23854468
https://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/22768979/fpart/10/vc/1#22768979
https://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/23596440#23596440


should i fetch more? it's delightful to see all the +1's!

and yes, it was a debate tactic.

Quote:

And this.

Yeah why ever care about anyone who isnt you?

---

Quote:

You are so disappointing, you're not far from being put on ignore. I honestly thought you were better than this.

---

tHEfLY said:

Quote:

In March, anti-Semitic posters were spread across the University of Illinois at Chicago attacking “white privilege” and going further by charging that white privilege is primarily “Jewish privilege.” Mockingly the posters ask: “Is the 1 [percent] straight white men” or “is the 1 [percent] Jewish?” The poster’s harangue has a dark, stated presumption: “Ending white privilege … starts with ending Jewish privilege.”

---

http://washingtonjewishweek.com/38929/the-noxious-notion-of-jewish-privilege/editorial-opinion/voices/

Are we allowed to mention jewish privilege on this forum, or would that be racist?

Why is it only ok to dehumanize white people in this way?

Oh right, because dehumanizing white people is the whole point.

---

tHEfLY said:

Are we allowed to mention jewish privilege on this forum, or would that be racist?
Why is it only ok to dehumanize white people in this way?
Oh right, because dehumanizing white people is the whole point.

---

akira_akuma said:

should i fetch more? it's delightful to see all the +1's!

---

knock yourself out you seem to be the only person who cares. continue to wank over all the +1s I've given you in the epoch when you weren't such an apologist.

Quote:

Someone privileged, it seems, does not experience life’s challenges, does not suffer in any way, does not endure pain or sadness, does not struggle and perhaps does not even bleed when pricked. Despite examples of great generosity and even personal sacrifice by established well-to-do families, someone privileged is automatically scorned as exploitative and made rich on the backs of those not privileged.

In this way, privilege is another form of dehumanization, and we witnessed its virulence played out after the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, and later in other areas of Soviet-dominated Eastern Europe after World War II. Insert “Kulak” for “privilege” and recall the state-sponsored animosity against not just aristocrats, but also shopkeepers, physicians, lawyers and farmers, anyone branded as an enemy of the worker’s paradise — an amorphous category of sub-human “haves” that deserved persecution, leading to the deaths of hundreds of millions.

Thus, as demonstrated by the illusionary connections made by the Illinois posters, the current preoccupation with privilege establishes fertile ground for the replanting and spreading of millennial-old anti-Semitic canards that foster hatred and distrust of Jews. After all, as long as there are a vast number of Americans, along with media outlets, institutions of higher learning and exploitive politicians buying into the notion of privilege, then if Jews are predominantly white and successful (as history teaches us, anti-Semites do not make gender differentiations), if they are thought to be the core inhabitants of an “indecent” 1 percent, then certainly suspicion must fall on them with attendant hatred.

---

Quote:

where is the dehumanisation of white people?

---

Tipote said:

akira_akuma said:

should i fetch more? it's delightful to see all the +1's!

---

knock yourself out you seem to be the only person who cares. continue to wank over all the +1s I've given you in the epoch when you weren't such an apologist.

---

Tipote said:

qman said:

"Dismantling these structures are just"

How is human nature a "structure" that can be "dismantled"?  It's universal along all people and cultures since the beginning of humankind, and now you're now going to change it.

---

Are you saying we shouldn't stop disproportionately disadvantaging people of colour because its "in our nature"?

Quote:

"tell me that the US was not built by slaves"
It wasn't, there was plenty of cheap labor available, slavery was completely uneconomical for a variety of reasons.

---

At some points in history, significant parts of the US wealth was from commodity trading in things like sugar, cotton, tobacco etc. Slave labour was integral to that. How is that controversial? 

Quote:

"If whites had been stolen from their countries and enslaved"
Well, this goes back to why it turned out the way it did. You do realize this game of life is based on survival and reproduction, correct?  The survival of the fittest doesn't follow the rules of justice and political correctness.

---

Are you framing slavery as just a matter of survival and reproduction? You are seriously fucked up. Whites had to invade other countries for their survival?

Quote:

Those people did what they thought was in their best interests for survival, if one group or race had the advantage they used it. Why did the whites have this major advantage, pure chance?

---

So you don't have a problem with slavery? And you don't think that slavery had any impact on race relations? Or you don't care because youre white?

---

tHEfLY said:

This is from the article I posted:

Quote:

Someone privileged, it seems, does not experience life’s challenges, does not suffer in any way, does not endure pain or sadness, does not struggle and perhaps does not even bleed when pricked.

---

---

The first sentence alone shows that the term isn't understood by the author.

Reminds me of this..

Quote:

In fact, white violence against blacks is dwarfed by black on white violence. In 2012, blacks committed 560,600 acts of violence against whites (excluding homicide), and whites committed 99,403 acts of violence (excluding homicide) against blacks, according to data from the National Crime Victimization Survey provided to the author. Blacks, in other words, committed 85 percent of the non-homicide interracial crimes of violence between blacks and whites, even though they are less than 13 percent of the population. Both the absolute number of incidents and the rate of black-on-white violence are therefore magnitudes higher than white-on-black violence. There is no white race war going on.

---